The G7, which was originally a
meeting-place for the Western leaders to better understand their respective
points of view, has now become a communication platform. Far from sharing their
opinions in private, the guests have become actors in a media show in which
each of them tries to deliver a convincing performance. The worst moment of
this G7 was the surprise concocted by Emmanuel Macron for the journalists, and
against his US guest.

*

A club, not a decision-making
organisation

At the moment of its creation in 1976
by Valery Giscard d’Estaing and Helmut Schmidt, the G-6 was a group for
informal discussion. The French President and the German Chancellor wanted to
exchange with their counterparts in order to understand their thoughts in the
context of the dollar crisis which occurred at the end of the Vietnam war. It
was not intended for making decisions, but thinking about the future of the
Western economy. The guests were the same as those who had been invited by the
US Treasury a little earlier, for the same reason. However, on this occasion,
the meeting did not unite the Ministries of Finance, but the heads of State or
government, to which Italy was added. The following year, Canada was also
invited.

With the dissolution of the Soviet
Union and the end of the division of the world into two camps, the G-7 began to
look at political questions, then associated Russia with these informal
discussions. But when Moscow rose again and opposed NATO in Syria, and refused
the coup d’état in Ukraine, trust was broken, and the Western powers decided to
meet together as before. This episode shut down any desire to admit the
participation of China.

The most recent G-7 meetings have
produced a quantity of Declarations and Communiqués. This literature has
formalised no decision, but has elaborated a common vocabulary which was all
the more verbose since US internal policy was dominated by the “politically
correct”. As always when one is unsure of having any counter-powers, the
separation between reality and this discourse has grown increasingly.

A deviation occurred in 2005 in the
United Kingdom, when Prime Minister Tony Blair attracted everyone’s attention
by assuring that the G8 which he was presiding intended to cancel the debt of
the 18 poorest countries in Africa. In reality, this was an empty promise – the
G8 never actualised this decision. Thereafter, 14 countries accepted Great
Britain’s selfish conditions, and rapidly regretted it. Four other countries
avoided the trap. This theatrical presentation left the false impression that
the G7/8 was a sort of world government.

It is essential that the G7 makes no
decision – that would amount to the creation of a cartel within the UNO General
Assembly, and violate the principle of equality of all states, irrespective of
their power. There already exists a privilege, recognised by the main victors
of the Second World War, of occupying permanent seats in the Security Council
and holding the right to a veto. It is a privilege which is a result of realism
– no majority of states can impose its will on such great powers.

The 2019 summit

In any case, the importance of this
informal meeting can be measured by the cumulative power of the guests. First
of all, let’s note the fact that the G-7 unites 9 personalities – the Presidents
of the European Commission and the European Council were also invited. It
happens that for reasons of health, Jean-Claude Junker was unable to attend.
Let’s then note that since 2015, the revolving president of the G7 has invited foreign
guests. Emmanuel Macron chose eight, of which three were already present last
year – two from the BRICS (India and South Africa), Australia (which had been
invited, like Canada, as a British dominion, and should, within a few years,
become members of NATO, thus constituting an anti-Chinese force with Japan),
and certain “clients” (Egypt, Burkina-Faso, Chile, Rwanda and Senegal). These
states will participate in certain meetings, but not all.

President Macron noted the possibility
of reintroducing Russia into this closed circle in 2020 (mentioned by President
Trump, who will then be presiding the club). This would first suppose that
Syria will be liberated, and that the adhesion of Crimea to the Russian
Federation be recognised. Besides this, for the participation of Moscow to have
any meaning, Russia will have start talking the same language as the Western
powers. Sergueï Lavrov has already politely replied that he will examine this
ludicrous proposition once it has been formalised.

After the fiasco of the G-7 in 2018,
where it proved impossible to elaborate a common language, Emmanuel Macron has
chosen to seek a wider and more general discourse, a strategy which always pays
off and threatens no-one - a societal and above all, not a social subject – the
“fight against inequality between women and men”. Cautiously, he warned that
this year there will be no final text.

On the economics level, the
consequences of the customs war that is being waged by the USA against China
are the main source of preoccupation for the members of the G7. Having no
intention of being set up as the accused, as he was last year, President Trump
has chosen to attack by denouncing French taxes on
Google/Apple/Facebook/Amazon. This is indeed his partner’s weak point. France
has chosen to attack the GAFA on the fiscal level, but has not reacted to two
more important questions – their monopolistic position and their violations of
individual freedoms. These should be resolved on the margins of the meeting in
Biarritz by the French and US Ministers of Finance.

A theatrical production by Emmanuel
Macron

Emmanuel Macron and his ex-theatre
teacher, now his wife Brigitte Trogneux-Macron, had planned a particular
production for this summit. No-one can deny its scenic quality and its unexpected
developments. The President began the summit with a short televised address [1]
during which he announced several spectacular initiatives and promised to
present the results on the evening of 26 August.

On the day preceding the summit, the
European medias had massively relayed a propaganda campaign according to which
the whole of the Amazon forest was burning. Its destruction would deprive the
Earth of oxygen and accelerate global warming. However, it is not the forest
that is burning, but deforested areas which are submitted to a technique of
clearing by fire – and the Amazon region only furnishes a very small percentage
of the oxygen in our atmosphere. In reality, certain members of the G7 are
hoping to avoid the ACTO (Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organisation) in order to
be able to exploit the fantastic mineral, pharmaceutical and timber resources
of the region. Emmanuel Macron has already authorised the exploitation by a
Franco-Canadian consortium of several gold mines in French Guyana, with no care
at all for the forest and its inhabitants. Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro
was right to denounce the colonial character of the G7 enterprise. Emmanuel
Macron’s lies will be heavy with consequence.

Another subject, and not the least –
the President himself claimed to have received a “mandate” from the G7 to
negotiate with Iran. This is evidently impossible, not only because the G7 does
not hand out mandates, but also because the USA never delegates this power to
other countries. After the world Press had relayed this stupidity with eyes
wide shut, and President Trump had waxed apoplectic, Emmanuel Macron recognised
his error. He immediately invited the Iranian Minister for Foreign Affairs,
Mohammad Javad Zarif, who arrived instantly in Biarritz, and then met with him.
It is impossible to be more spectacular than that, but the buzz was bought at
the cost of a public insult to his guest, Donald Trump, and discomfort for his
other guests.

The advisors for the Élysée claim that
the US President had given his accord, but to what? Mohammad Javad Zarif was
not allowed to enter the Hôtel du Palais, where the summit was being held. He
was accompanied for three hours by his counterpart Jean-Yves Le Drian and the
Minister of Finance, Bruno Lemaire, at the Town Hall of Biarritz. Emmanuel
Macron abandoned his G7 guests to join his two companions for half an hour.
Their meeting took place in the presence of British and German advisors. This
impromptu visit will not help the Irano-US conflict, but will set the United
States against both Iran and France. This scenario is the first serious
international error by a President whose sociopathic leanings have been well
known since long before his election. By sociopathy we mean a general tendency
towards indifference for social norms and rights, magnified by impulsive
behaviour.

Conclusion

President Donald Trump considers “politically
correct discourse” as the symptom of the hold of the globalist oligarchy on his
country. According to the Washington Post, he would have preferred to
avoid wasting his time in Biarritz. Clearly, the arrival in town of a guest he
did not want to see transformed his boredom into anger. The Élysée advisors
assure that Trump’s face to face meetings with his French counterpart went
wonderfully well, but according to Trump’s advisors, they were dreadful –
starting with breakfast. According to his advisor, Kelly Ann Shaw, the
President would prefer that in the next meeting, in 2020 in the United States,
new objectives will be implemented.

The final Declaration from the summit
in Biarritz [2] is no more than a brief catalogue of the points on which the
participants agree. Everyone may note that, despite President Macron’s
self-satisfaction, and the veneration with which a certain Press writes about him,
it could have been written well in advance – none of the subjects have evolved.